1 Introduction

Historically council housing is public housing that is
rented to
households who are unable to afford to rent from the private sector or buy their
own home. It has been called council housing due to the role of district and
borough councils managing the housing. More recently Registered Social
Landlords (RSLs), including semi-independent and not-for-profit housing associations,
have played a larger role in providing and managing housing, consequently
council and RSL housing is collectively known as âsocial housingâ.

The
underlying principle of council house provision is that historically the
private sector was deemed unable to provide adequate housing for all and state
intervention was required to ensure there was good quality affordable housing for low income households. The growth
of council housing in this country has been largely determined by
central government policies and legislation. Throughout the twentieth
century there has been a shifting emphasis between two main objectives -
the need to build more houses in the face of shortages, especially in
the post war periods, and the need to replace old designated slum areas
of cities. Each objective has received priority from Government at
different times over the years and their policies have influenced the
amount of new building and the type and quality of construction.

There is a variety of construction types seen in council housing
through the years, among them are garden estates built on greenfield
sites under early legalisation, innovative PRC construction at a time of
labour and material shortage in post war Britain and the development of
high density blocks of flats built in inner city slum clearance areas
which echo of modernist aspirations.

The following pages will guide you through the main chronological
events of the twentieth century from before council housing to the early days of providing good quality
homes for soldiers returning from the First World War, through slum
clearance programmes and the handling of the crisis of the post Second World
War housing shortage, to more current times of maintaining an aging stock
and implementing regeneration strategies.

2 Before Council Housing

Britainâs cities began to expand on a large scale during the nineteenth century largely due to
workers and labourers from the surrounding countryside flocking to the
city seeking work during the years of industrialisation and growing opportunity
for employment. House building at this time was largely done by profit-seeking
private builders. Mostly they built long streets of terraced houses and
these new communities were largely unplanned. The
large majority of the population rented privately, from a modest room in
a house to a grand residence in the country. Mainly due to the fact that
borrowing and mortgages had not become commonplace, only the richest
people could afford to own their own homes.

Problems of poor housing conditions, mostly in inner
city areas, grew steadily
as city populations increased. With the development of high density
unorganised neighbourhoods, overcrowding became commonplace. In the poorer areas of cities
families could be found huddled in dark and unsanitary courts of squalid
housing often without facilities and natural light. Some of the worst
conditions were found in London, Glasgow, Liverpool and Newcastle. Concerns began to grow across the country about public health
arguably this was stimulated by a fear among the middle classes of
infectious disease spreading from the overcrowded and insanitary working
class housing into where they lived. There was pressure on the Government to begin looking at housing
issues and they were slowly persuaded to intervene. It was argued that new private housing was too expensive for most working
class families and of these houses, most were built in the suburbs which
were too expensive and distant from their sites of employment.

Government begun to
pass various Acts mainly aimed to address the worst areas of housing
unfit for habitation or to improve or demolish existing houses. The most
important Act came in 1890: the âHousing for the Working Classes Actâ. Efforts
was made to build and regulate private Common Lodging Houses that
catered for those in the most need, like the one purpose built in
Bristol illustrated on the right. They provided accommodation mostly for single
men in little dormitories as seen left. Other private Lodging Houses
like the 'Britts Central Home for Men Only' (below) opened up
providing basic beds for some of the poorest people in society and were
mostly run by charitable trusts or voluntary organisations. There was
also a movement for improved housing from some independent organisations
such as the Bristol Industrial Dwellings Company who pioneered for
housing the poorer people in Bristol and succeeded in erecting three
blocks of flats containing 80 tenements in the area of Jacobâs Wells.

Up until 1919, although councils did have the power to
build houses, most had had little involvement. Some corporation family
housing was provided, mainly in London, Liverpool and Glasgow, often to rehouse
those displaced as the result of street improvement schemes. Londonâs local councils
had began to build
houses in the 1890s, one of its earliest schemes was the inner city Millbank
Estate in Westminster completed in 1902. The estate provided affordable rented
flats for 4,430 people on a site that had previously been the notorious Millbank
prison.

However in almost all areas, efforts to clear slum areas exceeded all
house construction, effectively reducing the number of low cost housing
available. Most pre-1919 corporation housing was built cheaply taking
the form of high density tenement blocks of flats with small rooms and
limited facilities including shared kitchen and toilets and no running
hot water. Typical rents where high which was no comfort to those on low
and irregular wages and thus did not provide housing for the very poor.
One reason for high rents was that before 1919 no corporation dwellings
received subsidy from central government. It wasnât until after the
First World War that housing became a real priority.

3 Homes for Heroes

In the years before the First World War private builders had supplied virtually all new
housing in towns and cities. The war, however, changed everything. Building
activity came to a virtual standstill whilst the country fought. By the
time of the General Election in 1918 it was becoming clear that the country faced an acute shortage of housing.
Building costs were inflated and this, combined with a scarcity of materials and
labour, made it impossible for the private developers to provide houses with rents
within reach of the average working class family. The close of the war also
brought a new social attitude that focused the Governmentâs attention on a
national responsibility to provide homes, giving rise to Lloyd George's famous
promise of 'homes fit for heroes' referring to the many
soldiers returning from the war.

The Housing and Town Planning Act of 1919 (The Addison Act) was seen
as a watershed in the provision of corporation (council) housing.
Councils were thrust to the forefront as the providers and they began to
plan their post-war housing programmes. Housing Committees were set up,
working largely from recommendations from central government's advisory
committee - the Tudor Walters Committee and encouraged
to build through the provision of generous subsidies. The subsidy
arrangements shared the costs of this new housing between the tenants,
local rate payers and the Treasury. Councils in areas of high housing
need
could apply for these subsidies. The London County
Council (the predecessor to the Greater London Council) also raised money
through selling London housing bonds which promised investors a 6% return and
raised Â£4 million during the 1920s.

Planners promoted the construction of new suburban âgardenâ estates,
situated on the outskirts of cities. Mainly consisting of three bed
houses for families, the design of the estates aimed to create
self-contained communities of low density - often with no more than 12 houses per acre.
Facilities, including churches, schools and shops, were provided; public houses were
initially excluded from the plans. On most estates, house were provided
with a
generous size garden to encourage the tenants to grow their own
vegetables, a privet hedge at the front and an apple tree at the back.
The interiors varied, some having a parlour, but all had a scullery and
bath. For most new tenants these new conditions were a huge improvement
on their previous slum housing where they had experienced overcrowding and
often were without even basic
facilities. The quality of the housing was generally high. Although some
slum clearance took place during the 1920s much of the emphasis of this
period was to provide new general needs housing on greenfield sites.

The most ambitious estate built to reward soldiers and their families after
the war was the massive Becontree estate in Dagenham which was to become the
largest council housing estate in the world. Work by the London County Council
on the estate started in 1921, farms were compulsory purchased and by 1932 over
25,000 houses had been built and over 100,000 people had moved to the area. The
new houses had gas and electricity, inside toilets, fitted baths and front and
back gardens. LCC also, however, had strict rules for new tenants on housework,
house and garden maintenance, childrenâs behaviour and the keeping of pets. The
estate expanded over the Essex parishes of Barking, Dagenham and Ilford with
nearly 27,000 homes in total creating a virtual new town with
dwellings for over 30,000 families.

Most of these new council estates, like Becontree, provided good quality housing for the better
off working classes but did not provide a solution for the poorer people in
society. Rents were high and subletting was forbidden so naturally the tenants
in the best position to pay were selected. High rents sometimes meant difficulty
in paying, as more applicants from unskilled occupations were housed.

The
Addison Act was passed initially as a temporary measure to meet the
housing need felt in the country as an effect of the war and at a time
when private builders could not meet the demand. It was generally
assumed that the private sector would resume responsibility for working
class housing once the British economy had recovered.

4 Inter-war Slum Clearance

The high building standards initially embraced in 1919 were gradually reduced
during the 1920s and 1930s, as cost considerations became paramount space and
amenities were reduced. The principle objective of the Wheatley Act of 1924 was
to secure a continuous building programme for period of 15 years and to
erect houses that could be let at lower rents to meet the position of
lower wage earners. This put pressures to reduce the size and standard of houses and
called for new council estates to be developed at a higher density. For
instance, during this period, a new three bedroom house was often only
620 square feet compared to over 1000 square feet in 1919. New council
housing was gradually becoming residualised and labelled for the very
poor, despite this they generally continued to provide good quality
accommodation.

After this initial burst of building activity across the country targeted at reducing the
post-war housing shortage, local councils began to tackle the problem of its
existing slum housing. The Housing Act of 1930 encouraged mass slum
clearance and councils set to work to demolish poor quality housing and replace
with new build. The photo on the left shows a designated Slum Officer
at work to prioritise the demolition. Slum areas of housing existed in most inner city areas
and were generally old, neglected and unhealthy places to live. Many of the
houses had originally built for workers during the period of rapid industrial
development often without thought for overcrowding or amenities such as an
adequate water supply, ventilation and sunlight. Using powers available under
the Act to acquire and demolish privately owned properties, slum clearance
schemes were put into action across the country.

By 1933 all authorities were required to concentrate efforts on slum
clearance; each had to submit a programme of building and demolition aimed at
eliminating slums from their districts. The city of Bristol had calculated they
had 25,000 people living in houses unfit for human habitation and proposed the
replacement of 5,000 unfit dwellings. Unlike the garden estates built directly after the First World War, much of
the slum clearance was replaced with flats, mostly three to five storeys high.
They were often modelled on schemes in continental Europe such as the
Quarry Hill flats in Leeds (shown left) which were inspired by a tour
the Karl Marx building - workers flats in Vienna. Non-traditional
building techniques were embraced - the photo to the right shows the
steel framework for two of the units that would comprise Quarry Hill
which was at this time the largest council house project in Europe.

Local councils tried initially to rehouse people locally back into the communities they
were forced to vacate following the demolition of inner city slum areas. However
central redevelopment was only ever confined to relatively small schemes
at this time and the vast
majority of new houses were built on new estates, most located on the fringes of
the cities. This was a combination of central policy and the high cost of inner
city land. The new tenants had to weigh up the disadvantage of a considerably
longer journey to work and sense of isolation against the benefits of a new well
equipped home.

Rents were generally lower in this period than they were for earlier
schemes built under the 1919 Housing Act. Despite this and a general
commitment to house those in most need, in practice the ability to pay
the rent played a crucial factor in allocation. Rents were set much
lower following the 1930 Housing Act in line with re-housing some of the
poorest people in society under slum clearance policy.

Tenancy conditions were strict and regulations were enforced from
the start. Some tenants were put off by the oppressive housing
management. In Liverpool women housing managers were employed to inspect
properties and instruct tenants on good housekeeping. Below is an
extract from a letter to new tenant from the Corporation of Bristol
Housing Estates on 15th June 1936 making an offer of a new house on the
Knowle West estate.

âThe Housing Committee realise that you have
been living under very undesirable conditions, and that in worn out
houses it is very difficult to get rid of vermin. But there will be no
excuse in your new house. Do not buy secondhand furniture, bedding or
pictures unless you are quite sure that the articles are free from
vermin. Insects do not like soap and hot water, and they also dislike
dusters and polish. So if in the new house you keep your windows open,
and keep your bodies and clothing, floors and stairs, furniture and
bedding clean; use the duster frequently on all skirting and ledges, you
are not likely to be troubled again with vermin. This sounds a lot, but
life isnât going to be all work for the housewife. The new house will be
easy to keep clean and it will be well worth looking after...â

5 Meeting the Post-war Housing Shortage

The outbreak of the Second World War effectively put a stop to house
building for a second time. As the war drew to a close, Britain faced its worst housing shortage of
the twentieth century. Thousands of houses across the country
had been lost by heavy bombing and many more were badly damaged. It was
estimated that 750,000 new homes were required in England and Wales in
1945 to provide all families with accommodation. Plans were drawn up for
a major building programme, drawing on the themes established prior to
1939. The election of 1945 saw a Labour government voted in and housing
policy was central to their welfare reforms in their manifesto. Aneurin
Bevan, the Minister of Health, was responsible for the housing programme
which focused heavily on local authority involvement rather than
reliance of the private sector. Added pressure on the Government came in
the form of soldiers returning from war and rising working class
expectations as a result of Labour's promises.

Part of the initial response was programme of short term repairs to
existing properties and the rapid construction of
âprefabsâ â factory built single storey temporary bungalows. These were highly controversial at the time but the Prime Minister
of the time, Winston
Churchill, was strongly in favour and initiated the Temporary Prefabricated
Housing programme. Churchill originally wanted half a million prefabs built
across the country as a stopgap measure until labour could be mobilised for more
permanent housing. They were expected to last for only 10 years but they proved
very popular with
some residents. There are still many lived in across the country with 330 in use
today in the city of Bristol - one of the largest concentrations of prefabs left
in the country. Over the years most prefabs have been demolished and replaced
with permanent housing.

The first prefabs were completed June 1945 only weeks after the war had
ended. Factories that had previously been employed to build other products such
as Aeroplanes were converted to build sections of the innovative new houses. It
took a minimum of 40 man-hours to assemble the two bedroom houses complete with
plumbing and heating. Sometimes prisoners of war who were still being held in
the country were used to help in the construction of the concrete slabs on which
the sections of bungalow were erected. The prefabs could be completed very
quickly once the sections were delivered to the site. Unlike traditional houses
they had fully fitted kitchens and bathrooms.

Despite the construction of 156,622 prefabs the country still faced an acute
housing shortage and waiting lists soared in urban areas. All over the country
local authorities took the lead in building homes for growing families. House
building battled on despite a shortage of materials and the worst winter in
living memory in 1947. New estates were emerging and established ones expanded,
at the peak of production in Bristol in 1955, 43 families per week were being
moved into brand new homes. Demand was so high that national league tables were
devised showing the numbers of council homes built across the country,
enormous pressure was put on Housing Departments to produce.

To meet the shortage and bring the cost of housing down, a new form of
construction was pioneered, commonly called âPRCâ (Pre-cast Reinforced
Concrete). These houses were quick to assemble and required less skilled labour
than traditional build. They were proprietary brands developed and marketed by
different builders. Largely made from concrete panels reinforced with steel
then bolted together or constructed with a steel frame. They included various
kinds such as Airey (left), Cornish, Wates, Unity (below left), Reema, Tarran, Woolaway
(below right) and
Parkinson types. The city of Leeds lead the way with the highest number of PRCs
built. They were like the prefabs in that they were built by non-traditional
methods from components made in a factory but unlike the prefabs they were
permanent and were expected to last for at least 60 years.

The construction of
these new quick build houses seemed like part of the solution to the
housing crisis at the time, however as we will see they were later to
cause major problems for tenants and councils across the country. In the
decade after 1945, 1.5 million homes had been completed and some of the
demand for housing had been alleviated. The percentage of the people
renting from local authorities had risen to over a quarter of the
population, from 10% in 1938 to 26% in 1961.

6 A New Urban Vision

The country was still faced with large areas of slum housing with many houses
described as unfit to live in and many more people living in sub-standard conditions.
Many of these houses had been due for demolition under slum clearance plans devised
before the war under the 1930 Housing Act and had been neglected since. Inner
city populations were growing rapidly and the shortage of good quality housing
combined with inner city vacant and derelict sites left by the bombs created
an opportunity for modernisers to promote a new urban vision. Architects and
planners favoured a modernist approach and the 'streets in the sky' were
devised. This was against a backdrop of political change, a new
Conservative government was elected in in 1951 and after initially
pledging to increase council house production in line with manifesto
targets, sizes and standards were reduced and a greater emphasis of
house building was given back to the private sector.

Councils could act under slum clearance powers to compulsory
purchase inner urban land and housing for redevelopment, most of the
existing housing was old and lacked any modern amenities however there
were some communities saved from redevelopment following protests from
local residents who fought and saved their neighbourhoods from âslumâ
status and demolition. Following in the themes of modernist ideas, many local councils built pre-fabricated blocks of flats. Derelict
inner city sites were
cleared of any remaining old streets and houses and pioneering new schemes were
planned.

The individual developments often included the coherent construction
of blocks of various sizes with a 'hub' that provided heating and hot water
services. Communal facilities such as a
laundry, creche, doctor's surgery, children play areas and stores for bikes and
prams were often intended to be part of the scheme. Many of the schemes
were controversial in their day, on the one hand people were allocated
modern flats with the all the modern facilities, however they often paid
the price of the break up of their established communities.

However, the concept of council high rise flats was criticised in
later years for creating poor quality badly built housing and
high-density estates and many of the new estates had become hard to let
and hard to live in by the 1970s. In reality many of the flats were
built at low cost on run-down inner city areas or alternatively on
remote low cost surburban sites, some quickly gaining a poor reputation.
One example is the Netherley Estate in Liverpool. Begun in late 1960s,
the estate was built to house people moving from the south dock area -
the Dingle. From the start the estate was poorly located with no local
employment and difficult and poor transport to the city centre. upon
completion in the early 1970s, the five storey concrete slab blocks of
flats were plagued with construction problems and rapidly required
expensive maintenance. The estate developed a bad reputation with a high
concentration of problem tenants. Within ten years of completion, the
council began to move people out and rehouse them elsewhere. Netherley
Estate has since been demolished at massive cost.

The increased development of high rise blocks of flats during the
1950s and 60s can be directly attributed to a response to the
Government's subsidy system. From 1956, subsidy was confined to new
houses built to replace those lost to slum clearance and there was more
money available for blocks of more than six storeys high. Helped by this
subsidy, neighbourhoods all over the country were being demolished and
rebuilt according to modern town planning concepts of mixed estates with
low and high-rise building. Council house building redoubled in London
and by the 1960s over 500,000 new flats had been added to Londonâs
stock. Many of the new dwellings were in the form of multi-storey tower
blocks which seems the ideal solution to the housing problem at the
time.

7 Pushing the Boundaries and Housing All

Another feature of the post-war expansion of council housing during
the 1950s and 1960s was the development of more new peripheral estates
on or close to the edge of the cities. By this time most inner city
potential building sites had been exhausted and faced with growing
waiting lists of people needing housing councils turned to the
peripheries. Sometimes city boundaries were expanded to embrace these
new estates. Peripheral expansion was partly about rehousing people from
the congested inner city areas where redevelopment was taking place, and
partly about responding to the sheer growth in demand for housing during
the âbaby boomâ period up until the 1970âs.

A common difficulty for new residents on these surburb estates was
the distance from the city centre and often inadequate bus service.
People were often moved in before roads and pavements were finished.
Many had to contend with thick mud and a feeling of isolation in their
new community. Schools, shops and other facilities on the new estates
were slow to follow but at least the councils were prepared to discuss
the inclusion of public houses in their plans by now! The majority new
homes built on these estates were typical two story houses, but there
was also a significant amount of high-rise building - mainly as a result
of the higher subsidy available and also as a result of architectural
fashion. It was hoped these flats could meet the growing demand for
accommodation from other types of households - smaller families, young
couples and the elderly population.

Housing provision for the elderly population had historically been
met by charitable means. Almshouses, mostly built during the nineteenth
century, provided a resting home for the fortunate few who were offered
accommodation, alternatively many older people ended up in workhouses or
institutional accommodation. The issue of meeting the housing needs for
the elderly population began to be considered seriously by local
councils by the 1940s. It was believed that the duty of making housing
provision for older people must be the responsibility of the council and
purpose built elderly housing like those shown on the left should be
included in the programme of building. In 1946 the number of pensioners
in Britain was over 4,000,000 and it was admitted that only a fraction
had access to suitable accommodation. Up until this time, most councils
had concentrated on building family homes, largely in the new suburban
estates.

8 The Impact of the âRight to Buyâ

From the 1970s councils built increasingly fewer homes, concentrating instead
on repairs to their now aging housing stock. The introduction of the âRight to
Buyâ under the Housing Act 1980 was a watershed event for councils all over the
country. From the start local authorities have been able to sell off their
houses, but until the introduction of the RTB they were not forced to do
so. Up until this time mostly the production of new homes exceeded the
numbers sold, however following the passing of this policy, the period
of growth halted and began a decline. Largely it led to many of the better quality council properties being purchased
by tenants who qualified for the right to buy. The number of houses managed by
Londonâs councils had shrunk from 840,000 in 1984 to just over 500,000 by the
end of the century. Another impact of the right to buy was that the majority of
dwellings that were sold were houses rather than flats. So the right to
buy has reduced the supply of family houses and altered the balance of
council housing stock in the country.

Nationally 1 million houses were sold within 10 years. Spending
restrictions were also introduced at the same time which that it was no
longer possible to build new houses in large numbers. After fifty years
of virtually uninterrupted growth, the numbers of council houses began
to fall, and have continued to do so ever since. Discounts available to
tenants under the Right to Buy of up to 60 per cent off the market price
meant that good houses could be purchased for less than Â£10,000 in the
early 1980s; they are now likely to be worth Â£150,000 or more. So for
many people the right to buy has been a great benefit.

But for some purchasers and the Council, however, it caused severe
problems. In 1981 it began to be revealed that there were major
structural problems with some types of concrete houses (referred to as
PRCs). Several types of the PRCs had problems caused with corrosion of
the metal reinforcing bars in their concrete structure. This made them
unmortgageable and therefore people who had bought these sorts of houses
found that they were effectively impossible to resell. There are
approximately 140,000 cases nationally. The Housing Defects Act, 1984,
gave buyers of certain types of PRC houses the right to insist that the
Council carry out the work necessary to repair or rebuild their houses.

9 The Future of Council Housing

Local councils are now faced with a stock of older houses and they will
continue to need a large programme of investment to keep them up to date.
With changing tastes and prefences, accommodation that is no longer suitable or acceptable to tenants will need to
be replaced. Many councils were saddled with housing debt and this combined with
restrictions on investment has effectively brought a halt to new building by
councils themselves. Council housing has increasing become a residual housing
tenure, providing home for only the very poor, homeless and those
with no alternative form of accommodation. This process of
residualisation can be traced back through government policy - to the
1930s - the mid 1950s and confirmed by Conservative governments since
1979. Generally there has been a retreat from council house provision
and a curb on housing expenditure along side measures to encourage the
private sector.

Improvement and regeneration have become priorities. Housing providers now
have an obligation to bring all their homes up to the set âdecencyâ standard by
2010 and to ensure that no-one is disadvantaged by where they live. New funds
have been available from central government for a succession of regeneration
programmes, they were however often conditional on transferring the management
of their housing stock to housing associations or RSLs. This option has been
widely taken since the 1990s as the nations stock aged and maintenance costs
rose The process is known as stock transfer and was introduced in the Housing
and Planning Act 1986. Already a quarter of local housing authorities in the
country are no longer landlords â they do not have specific responsibilities
such as rent collection or repairs and maintenance however they remain in law
the local housing authority with the responsibility of providing a strategic and
community leadership within their locality.

The make up and demographic of council estates have changed in tenure and
appearance since their beginnings. The impact of the right to buy has turned the
former council estates into mixed tenure areas, where tenants and homeowners
live side by side. Some cities display a polarisation between the more
successful council estates peppered with Right to Buys and less popular estates
where a greater sense social deprivation is apparent.

Today the social rented sector (a combination of council and RSL managed
housing) makes up 20% of the housing stock. The importance of provision of
social rented housing in meeting housing shortage has diminished and government
has placed more importance on its use as a safety net for vulnerable households.
The country still has an overall strategic goal of providing decent affordable
homes for its people and is proud to be one of the few countries in the world
where specified groups, such as the homeless, have a legally enforceable right
to housing.